Cost aside, I see security as the weak link. I don't know how we'd keep cattle and elk off the track. Or deranged madmen from taking a stolen excavator to the track just as a 220mph bullet train carrying 500 people gets there.

And that concern aside, I think it makes more sense to build high speed rail with a regional mentality before constructing a coast to coast straight shot. Regional rail would eliminate the need for business air shuttle flights, and get a lot of cars off the road.

I'm not sure if cross-country trips would be easier than flying, but if you set up high speed train networks linking up major cities on each coast and priced it lower than flying, I think it would be incredibly popular among people looking for an inexpensive, spur-of-the-moment weekend getaway.

I was thinking you could link up these cities:West coast: LA, San Diego, San Francisco, Vegas, PhoenixEast coast: NYC, Boston, Atlantic City, Philadelphia, DC

I mean, if you lived in Phoenix, how awesome would a 2-hour, $100 train ride to Vegas be?

muck4doo:That's the retard perspective of it. You got that nailed down.

Aside from the sarcasm, what part is wrong? Conservatives have historically fought tooth and nail to defend unnecessary subsidies to the extraordinarily profitable oil and gas industries (and, until more recently, coal). They also fight tooth and nail to defend excess military spending even when it means going head to head with actual military leaders over what the military thinks it needs to be buying.

They also traditionally hate any sort of public infrastructure project that isn't part of their own district. They fight against high speed rail, they fight against light rail, they fight against improving urban bus systems.

I'll agree on one point, though. It's not that they're afraid of trains.

It's that they're vile little pants-sniffing scumbags who don't think we shouldn't ever do anything unless what we do benefits people who are already rich.

Aside from the sarcasm, what part is wrong? Conservatives have historically fought tooth and nail to defend unnecessary subsidies to the extraordinarily profitable oil and gas industries (and, until more recently, coal). They also fight tooth and nail to defend excess military spending even when it means going head to head with actual military leaders over what the military thinks it needs to be buying.

They also traditionally hate any sort of public infrastructure project that isn't part of their own district. They fight against high speed rail, they fight against light rail, they fight against improving urban bus systems.

I'll agree on one point, though. It's not that they're afraid of trains.

It's that they're vile little pants-sniffing scumbags who don't think we shouldn't ever do anything unless what we do benefits people who are already rich.

So in other words you have no argument as to how this makes any monetary sense other than you can stick it to the evil gas and coal conservatives.

Aside from the sarcasm, what part is wrong? Conservatives have historically fought tooth and nail to defend unnecessary subsidies to the extraordinarily profitable oil and gas industries (and, until more recently, coal). They also fight tooth and nail to defend excess military spending even when it means going head to head with actual military leaders over what the military thinks it needs to be buying.

They also traditionally hate any sort of public infrastructure project that isn't part of their own district. They fight against high speed rail, they fight against light rail, they fight against improving urban bus systems.

I'll agree on one point, though. It's not that they're afraid of trains.

It's that they're vile little pants-sniffing scumbags who don't think we shouldn't ever do anything unless what we do benefits people who are already rich.

Why do you hate the job creators?!?!?! If the men who run the oil companies aren't unfathomably rich, they won't feel like working anymore and they'll just shut the companies down. Then we'll have no oil at all!

serpent_sky:For those of us who have never been on a plane and have no desire to ever be on a plane, that sounds pretty awesome. Liberal or otherwise.

For all the griping about the TSA, planes aren't that scary. You really shouldn't criticize what you don't know, flying is about as safe a mode of transport as you can get, not ridiculously uncomfortable, and you can get drunk if you so please.

It's just stupid to insist that you have no desire to ever experience something without any knowledge of exactly what you'd be experiencing.

slayer199:Shorter distances, more condensed population centers...or did you miss that point.

You keep saying this, but there's no evidence. Europe is larger than the United States, first of all. Second of all, while Europe does have a population density about twice as dense as us, that number includes Alaska, where there are no people. And if we just leave out the Northern Plains from our rail system, we're relatively close to their density to the point where the objection based on density needs much more empirical evidence than just saying the word.

Aside from the sarcasm, what part is wrong? Conservatives have historically fought tooth and nail to defend unnecessary subsidies to the extraordinarily profitable oil and gas industries (and, until more recently, coal). They also fight tooth and nail to defend excess military spending even when it means going head to head with actual military leaders over what the military thinks it needs to be buying.

They also traditionally hate any sort of public infrastructure project that isn't part of their own district. They fight against high speed rail, they fight against light rail, they fight against improving urban bus systems.

I'll agree on one point, though. It's not that they're afraid of trains.

It's that they're vile little pants-sniffing scumbags who don't think we shouldn't ever do anything unless what we do benefits people who are already rich.

Life must be so easy when you dismiss your political opponents as evil genius retards.Taking that a priori makes sure you never have any thoughts that, if harbored for any length of time, would lead to ouster from the tribe.

cptjeff:serpent_sky: For those of us who have never been on a plane and have no desire to ever be on a plane, that sounds pretty awesome. Liberal or otherwise.

For all the griping about the TSA, planes aren't that scary. You really shouldn't criticize what you don't know, flying is about as safe a mode of transport as you can get, not ridiculously uncomfortable, and you can get drunk if you so please.

It's just stupid to insist that you have no desire to ever experience something without any knowledge of exactly what you'd be experiencing.

I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

Best of all, the same minimum-wage morons who are entitled to touch your genitals and take naked pictures of you get to hassle you like crazy if you protest.

/taking a trip south on Amtrak in two days//looking forward to eating a cheeseburger on the way

took Amtrak From Richmond Va to West Palm beach last year.

19 hours.

the club car isn't...... TERRIBLE.. but it's all pretty much convenience store stuff they shove into a microwave. the booze isn't that expensive, at least compared to airplane booze.

no wifi on the southern bound trains.wifi on the trains is based off of cell service anyways. I was able to tether my phone to my lap top for a good deal of the trip, but a good data connection was spotty. and completely went out for hours at a time as I was out of range of any towers, anywhere near the rail line.

bring a good book, or three, and load up the laptop or whatever with some movies.. bring snacks. there will not be anytime to get a good meal, unless you are on a good train. Like the Auto train express from DC to Orlando is first class service, other wise.. its a long haul commuter like a step above taking the bus.

good thing though! each set of seats has a 120volt outlet, so you can at least keep powered up.

otherwise, it wasn't all that bad traveling by rail really. kinda relaxing.

gimmegimme:DamnYankees: gimmegimme: I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

What the hell are you talking about.

In order to get on the plane, you must submit to unreasonable search and seizure. Right? Was all of that repealed and I missed it?

It's not a search and seizure. Getting on a plane is a completely voluntary activity. There's absolutely no obligation on your part to do it. You might think its overly invasive and therefore decide to not fly on planes, but the idea that its unconstitutional is ridiculous.

DamnYankees:gimmegimme: DamnYankees: gimmegimme: I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

What the hell are you talking about.

In order to get on the plane, you must submit to unreasonable search and seizure. Right? Was all of that repealed and I missed it?

It's not a search and seizure. Getting on a plane is a completely voluntary activity. There's absolutely no obligation on your part to do it. You might think its overly invasive and therefore decide to not fly on planes, but the idea that its unconstitutional is ridiculous.

Well, then I suppose that Jeffrey Rosen, a guy who's written a bunch of great books about law and who teaches law at Georgetown is ridiculous. Link: WaPo

gimmegimme:DamnYankees: gimmegimme: DamnYankees: gimmegimme: I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

What the hell are you talking about.

In order to get on the plane, you must submit to unreasonable search and seizure. Right? Was all of that repealed and I missed it?

It's not a search and seizure. Getting on a plane is a completely voluntary activity. There's absolutely no obligation on your part to do it. You might think its overly invasive and therefore decide to not fly on planes, but the idea that its unconstitutional is ridiculous.

Well, then I suppose that Jeffrey Rosen, a guy who's written a bunch of great books about law and who teaches law at Georgetown is ridiculous. Link: WaPo

Holy crap - you cited an opinion article of a guy who agrees with you. Well done.

muck4doo:gimmegimme: DamnYankees: gimmegimme: I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

What the hell are you talking about.

In order to get on the plane, you must submit to unreasonable search and seizure. Right? Was all of that repealed and I missed it?

The derp is strong in this one.

Come on, now. I like having my genitals fondled as much as you do. Just not by government mandate and not by a stranger. (You know...unless I get to pick the stranger.)

DamnYankees:gimmegimme: DamnYankees: gimmegimme: DamnYankees: gimmegimme: I refuse to travel by plane because it saddens me to be confronted so strongly with our loss of freedom and how little anyone else cares about the Constitution.

What the hell are you talking about.

In order to get on the plane, you must submit to unreasonable search and seizure. Right? Was all of that repealed and I missed it?

It's not a search and seizure. Getting on a plane is a completely voluntary activity. There's absolutely no obligation on your part to do it. You might think its overly invasive and therefore decide to not fly on planes, but the idea that its unconstitutional is ridiculous.

Well, then I suppose that Jeffrey Rosen, a guy who's written a bunch of great books about law and who teaches law at Georgetown is ridiculous. Link: WaPo

Holy crap - you cited an opinion article of a guy who agrees with you. Well done.

No...a famous and well-respected professor of law. I think we usually agree on things. I wonder what is keeping us apart on this.

MisterTweak:Have you looked at how long it takes to get there *now*? Probably won't gain you time from major coastal hubs, but try getting from White Plains, NY to New Orleans, LA - if you only have to change planes once each way. Pick somwhere a little further from a major airport pair and it gets a lot more interesting having the rail option.

Air travel is a great subsidy for a few big cities.

You didn't look at The Map, did you?

There ya go. The mythical high speed trains only stop in a few big cities. If the trains stopped at every little podunk station, it would take forever to travel a significant distance. (Kinda like how it is now.) So, just like air travel, many people will have to drive for hours to get to a station then pay more money to spend 3x as long as flying travelling to the next big city.

jtown:MisterTweak: Have you looked at how long it takes to get there *now*? Probably won't gain you time from major coastal hubs, but try getting from White Plains, NY to New Orleans, LA - if you only have to change planes once each way. Pick somwhere a little further from a major airport pair and it gets a lot more interesting having the rail option.

Air travel is a great subsidy for a few big cities.

You didn't look at The Map, did you?

[www.slate.com image 568x367]

There ya go. The mythical high speed trains only stop in a few big cities. If the trains stopped at every little podunk station, it would take forever to travel a significant distance. (Kinda like how it is now.) So, just like air travel, many people will have to drive for hours to get to a station then pay more money to spend 3x as long as flying travelling to the next big city.

That's the worst part of going Greyhound. It wouldn't be so bad if it were express from, say, New York to Cleveland. But you have to get off the Interstate and drive 50 miles to some one-streetlight town and then drive 40 miles in the other direction to a Wal-Mart parking lot to pick up one guy and then drive another 35 miles until you get back on the Interstate at the original exit.

MisterTweak:Have you looked at how long it takes to get there *now*? Probably won't gain you time from major coastal hubs, but try getting from White Plains, NY to New Orleans, LA - if you only have to change planes once each way. Pick somwhere a little further from a major airport pair and it gets a lot more interesting having the rail option.